Thank you for your agency's letter of February 24, 2000 addressed to Members
of Congress. While I am pleased the National Security Agency (NSA) has
begun to respond to widespread public concerns about its activities, your
response points out several problems with the existing legal and oversight
structure.

First, I agree the Fourth Amendment's protections supersede any
technological changes that may impact surveillance activities. However,
your assurances that privacy cannot be violated by NSA simply because "the
Fourth Amendment transcends whatever technology happens to be involved in a
particular form of electronic surveillance," grossly oversimplifies the
difficulty of protecting privacy in light of recent technological advances.

For example, there is debate about the precise meaning of the phrase
"persons, houses, papers, and effects," which helps define the perimeters of
the Fourth Amendment. As American citizens begin to use an array of new
technologies to communicate, it is incumbent on our federal government to
make sure communications such as e-mail, faxes, and telephone calls receive
the same protections the Founders clearly sought for written mail.
Further, as more domestic communications cross international borders, the
Intelligence Community has a responsibility to ensure they are accorded the
same protection as other communications that begin and end in the United
States, without crossing an international border in the process.

Additionally, your letter points out how little legislative authority backs
the National Security Agency's activities. At numerous points in your
attached fact sheets, you make reference to Executive Orders regulating and
authorizing NSA activities. As you know, an Executive Order can be
rewritten or revoked on a moment's notice, whereas legislative restrictions
are more permanent. As past NSA abuses have shown, privacy rights are
better protected by relying on an evolving, explicit legal structure than by
counting solely on the good faith of government employees wielding massive
power and reciting generalities.

In light of these facts, I would ask the NSA to join our efforts to
meaningfully and objectively review the effectiveness of existing law and
regulation at protecting the privacy rights of Americans both now and in the
future. Such a comprehensive review would build far more public confidence
in your agency and its vital mission than simply offering pat assurances
that the privacy rights of Americans are being protected in surveillance
activities.